Transplantation as an abstract good: practising deliberate ignorance in deceased organ donation in Denmark

"I am in favour of organ donation, but I feel you should opt-in"-qualitative analysis of the #options 2020 survey free-text responses from NHS staff toward opt-out organ donation legislation in England

BACKGROUND

In May 2020, England moved to an opt-out organ donation system, meaning adults are presumed to be an organ donor unless within an excluded group or have opted-out. This change aims to improve organ donation rates following brain or circulatory death. Healthcare staff in the UK are supportive of organ donation, however, both healthcare staff and the public have raised concerns and ethical issues regarding the change. The #options survey was completed by NHS organisations with the aim of understanding awareness and support of the change. This paper analyses the free-text responses from the survey.

METHODS

The #options survey was registered as a National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) portfolio trial [IRAS 275992] 14 February 2020, and was completed between July and December 2020 across NHS organisations in the North-East and North Cumbria, and North Thames. The survey contained 16 questions of which three were free-text, covering reasons against, additional information required and family discussions. The responses to these questions were thematically analysed.

RESULTS

The #options survey received 5789 responses from NHS staff with 1404 individuals leaving 1657 free-text responses for analysis. The family discussion question elicited the largest number of responses (66%), followed by those against the legislation (19%), and those requiring more information (15%). Analysis revealed six main themes with 22 sub-themes.

CONCLUSIONS

The overall #options survey indicated NHS staff are supportive of the legislative change. Analysis of the free-text responses indicates that the views of the NHS staff who are against the change reflect the reasons, misconceptions, and misunderstandings of the public. Additional concerns included the rationale for the change, informed decision making, easy access to information and information regarding organ donation processes. Educational materials and interventions need to be developed for NHS staff to address the concepts of autonomy and consent, organ donation processes, and promote family conversations. Wider public awareness campaigns should continue to promote the positives and refute the negatives thus reducing misconceptions and misunderstandings.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

National Institute of Health Research (NIHR) [IRAS 275992].

Governance quality indicators for organ procurement policies

Background

Consent policies for post-mortem organ procurement (OP) vary throughout Europe, and yet no studies have empirically evaluated the ethical implications of contrasting consent models. To fill this gap, we introduce a novel indicator of governance quality based on the ideal of informed support, and examine national differences on this measure through a quantitative survey of OP policy informedness and preferences in seven European countries.

Methods

Between 2017–2019, we conducted a convenience sample survey of students (n = 2006) in Austria (AT), Belgium (BE), Denmark (DK), Germany (DE), Greece (GR), Slovenia (SI) and Spain (ES), asking participants about their donation preferences, as well as their beliefs and views about the policy in place. From these measures, we computed indices of informedness, policy support, and fulfilment of unexpressed preferences, which we compared across countries and consent systems.

Results

Our study introduces a tool for analyzing policy governance in the context of OP. Wide variation in policy awareness was observed: Most respondents in DK, DE, AT and BE correctly identified the policy in place, while those in SI, GR and ES did not. Respondents in opt-out countries (AT, BE, ES and GR) tended to support the policy in place (with one exception, i.e., SI), whereas those in opt-in countries (DE and DK) overwhelmingly opposed it. These results reveal stark differences in governance quality across countries and consent policies: We found a preponderance of informed opposition in opt-in countries and a general tendency towards support–either informed or uninformed–in opt-out countries. We also found informed divergence in opt-in countries and a tendency for convergence–either informed or uninformed–among opt-out countries.

Conclusion

Our study offers a novel tool for analyzing governance quality and illustrates, in the context of OP, how the strengths and weaknesses of different policy implementations can be estimated and compared using quantitative survey data.

Explaining Ignoring – Working with Information that Nobody Uses

Research has demonstrated how ignorance is made, manipulated and called upon; how it is the result of strategies, activities and structures. This article extends the literature on ignorance by exploring actors’ own explanations of their self-inflicted ignorance following acts of ignoring. By means of a case analysis, we explore how actors explain and justify ignoring data they themselves produced. We provide a multifaceted model of how ignoring actors’ own rationales, facilitated by contextual conditions, enables persistent acts of ignoring the content and dysfunction of collectively upheld systems. We contribute to the understanding of ignorance by demonstrating how self-inflicted ignorance is made possible by the combination of ignoring rationales and their facilitators, which configures buffers against knowledge-seeking efforts.

Assembling organ donation: situating organ donation in hospital practice

In this article I argue for the need to situate deceased organ donation in and as a hospital practice. This study puts the spotlight on the practical conditions that enable and emplace organ donation in the hospital setting. The analytical move serves the political purpose to inform and interrogate dominant policy framings intended to address the problem of organ shortage. I present an ethnographic investigation that draws upon a Science and Technology Studies (STS) approach to make visible the sociomaterial arrangements that bring together people, things and politics in the assembling of organ donation at a Catalan hospital. A progressive and indeterminate process which might fall through and become disassembled at any given time. This, as I explain, challenges current opt-out policy that unnecessarily reduces donation to an individual choice to be decided upon in life. Instead, and drawing on ethnographic materials, I propose a situated and relational understanding of organ donation: an embedded health care and procurement practice enacted as a collective accomplishment. I conclude that (more) responsible donation policies need to be informed by, and attuned to, the situated practicalities and enduring tensions that condition and constrain the assembling of organ donation at the hospital setting.

Giving, receiving … and forgetting? On the social conditions of receiving an anonymous face transplant

In 2004, the French National Consultative Ethics Committee expressed strong misgivings about the proposal to include the face among body parts that can be removed from deceased donors for organ transplantation. Yet, the first face transplant was performed a few months later. How do medical teams and patients deal with the singular nature of the face? I argue that what the face represents - from the medium of the donor's personal identity to an interchangeable organ - is not fixed. It emerges through the practices and can evolve through the interactions between medical professionals and patients. In the postoperative time, I show that patients receive potentially contradictory recommendations about how to integrate the organ: to consider it theirs and forget the donor, but also to thank the donor for the donation and never forget the origin of the graft. Based on the plurality of relationships developed by the patients with their donor, I revisit Maussian interpretative analyses of organ reception. The effects of giving a face vary both in terms of reciprocity and identity: the feeling of debt is variably felt and can be interpreted negatively or positively, and the experience is more or less transformative.

'Saying no to organ donation': an empirical typology of reluctance and rejection

In Germany, as well as in other countries, organ shortages are usually explained by a relative unwillingness to donate among a population which is assumed to be caused by a lack of information and mistrust of the system. As we can see in the data of our qualitative research (focus groups and interviews), lack of information or mistrust are not the only reasons for people to be reluctant to agree to the donation of their organs after death. In fact we can identify four positions: (1) information deficit; (2) mistrust; (3) no killing; and (4) bodily integrity. The first and second are the two prominent explanations in the public discourse about low donation rates. The third and the fourth instead have neither been adequately articulated nor been discussed as a proper argument. Therefore, by means of sociology of critique, we discuss their contribution to the discourse as comprehensible reasons for reluctance and present them as credible positions of criticism: These two positions illuminate fundamental and universal values of the inviolability of the person and human dignity. Thus, both positions are consistent and morally justifiable and should be addressed with sensitivity.

Organs and organisations: Situating ethics in organ donation after circulatory death in the UK

Controlled organ donation after circulatory death (DCD) has recently been revived in the UK, as part of attempts to increase organ donation rates. The re-introduction of DCD has subsequently become the focus of bioethical controversy, since it necessitates intervening in the care of dying patients to obtain quality donor organs. Transplant policy responses to these concerns have generated new legal and ethical guidelines to address uncertainties around DCD, producing claims that the UK has overcome' the ethical challenge of DCD. In contrast, by drawing on Lynch's call to 'respecify' ethics, this paper argues that ethics in DCD cannot be reduced to abstract directives for practice, but, instead, are composed and dealt with as an organisational problem. To do this, I utilise data from an ethnographic study examining the production of the 'minority ethnic organ donor' within UK organ donation settings; in particular, the data pertains to a case hospital which was in the process of developing a DCD programme during the period of fieldwork. Findings show that the ethics of DCD are encountered as practical sets of problems, constructed in relation to particular institutional locales. I describe how these issues are worked-around by creating conditions to make DCD organisationally possible, and through the animation of standard procedures into acceptable forms of practice. I argue that ethics in DCD go far beyond normative bioethical principles, to encompass concerns around: the reputation of hospital Trusts, public perceptions of organ donation, the welfare of potential donor families, and challenges to the work of health professionals caring for dying patients. The paper enriches understanding of ethics in science and medicine by showing how ethics are assembled and negotiated as a practical-organisational concern, and calls for further examination of how DCD gets constructed as a potential problem and is made to happen in practice.

From motivation to acceptability: a survey of public attitudes towards organ donation in Denmark

BACKGROUND

Over the past three decades, public attitudes to organ donation have been a subject of numerous studies focusing on donor motivation. Here, we present a fresh approach. We suggest focusing on public acceptability instead of motivation. The point is to understand public attitudes well enough to avoid risking public support for organ transplantation. We conducted the study in Denmark because there have been significant developments in public attitudes to organ donation in this country. In the 1990s, Denmark was a country with very low public support for organ donation and Denmark was the last country in Europe to introduce brain death as a legal criterion of death, whereas today Eurobarometer surveys rate Denmark as one of the European countries with the highest support for deceased organ donation from brain dead donors.

METHODS

We conducted a telephone survey in Denmark (N = 1195). A questionnaire was developed on the basis of preceding qualitative studies and pilot testing and included reuse of one item from earlier surveys to facilitate historical comparison. The analysis of the data was carried out using IBM SPSS Statistics 22 and focused on descriptive statistics.

RESULTS

A clear majority of 91.9 % are positive or very positive towards organ donation; 85.8 % like the idea of their body being used after their death, 85.0 % is willing to donate their own organs, 82.1 % to donate their tissue and only 2.3 % find that too much has been done to promote organ donation. There is limited support for monetary incentives for organ donation (5.8 %) and presumed consent (30.4 %), while a majority (63.9 %) supports making it mandatory to register a personal decision. Religious self-identification has limited impact on attitudes.

CONCLUSIONS

We can identify a shift over the past three decades from marked opposition to organ transplantation to strong support as well as a pattern in the contemporary public attitudes, which can help explain what is central to public acceptability: self-determination. Policies fostering choice are met with a majority of positive attitudes, while presumed consent and monetary incentives are met with more negative attitudes. Our approach calls for comparative studies in other countries to generate a better overall understanding of the conditions of acceptability, which need to be in place to ensure the long-term social robustness of organ donation and thereby safeguard this important medical technology.

"Make Sure Somebody Will Survive from This": Transformative Practices of Hope among Danish Organ Donor Families

Based on anthropological fieldwork among Danish organ donor families and hospital staff in neurointensive care units, this article explores the transformative practices of hope in Danish organ donation. Focusing on various phases of the organ donation process, I demonstrate how families and professionals practice hope in astounding ways: when hoping for organs, when hoping for the end of patient suffering, when hoping for the usability of the donor body, and when hoping to help future donor families by sharing painful experiences. By focusing on such practices and transformations of hope, this article sheds light on the social negotiations of life and death among families and staffs in medical contexts and describes how the dignity of the deceased donor and the usability of the donor body are closely connected in family attempts to make donation decisions meaningful during and after a tragic death.

Rendered invisible? The absent presence of egg providers in U.K. debates on the acceptability of research and therapy for mitochondrial disease

Techniques for resolving some types of inherited mitochondrial diseases have recently been the subject of scientific research, ethical scrutiny, media coverage and regulatory initiatives in the UK. Building on research using eggs from a variety of providers, scientists hope to eradicate maternally transmitted mutations in mitochondrial DNA by transferring the nuclear DNA of a fertilised egg, created by an intending mother at risk of transmitting mitochondrial disease, and her male partner, into an enucleated egg provided by another woman. In this article we examine how egg providers for mitochondrial research and therapy have been represented in stakeholder debates. A systematic review of key documents and parliamentary debates shows that the balance of consideration tilts heavily towards therapeutic egg providers; research egg providers have been ignored and rendered invisible. However, mapping the various designations of therapeutic egg providers shows that their role is so heavily camouflaged that they have only an absent presence in discussions. We explore this puzzling ambivalence towards egg providers whose contributions are necessary to the success of current mitochondrial research and proposed therapies. We suggest that labels that diminish the contributions of egg providers serve certain governance objectives in managing possible future claims about, and by, therapeutic egg providers. We demonstrate that the social positioning of research egg providers is entangled within that of therapeutic egg providers which means that the former can also never receive their due recognition. This article contributes to the wider literature on the governance of new technological interventions.